\w..\w* in footnote throws attribute errors... with Schema check

Question

The following verse:
\v 3 Ti oom pícimpaŋ pakan keemeeŋe kéekuuñe nkahinto: kéefuume, kéehute niŋ payenka nkanow niŋ efank.\f + \fr 5:3 \ft An ámiit man Saŋ lompo akiice fiye: “Hítuulu nkayeniye man ma kati muwenee. \fv 4\fv* Kaatuko \w maleekoo|Maleekoo\w* eti Pútuun neloom ékey neewen man ma. Niŋ epayaa mo hiwenu, aŋa náyaañ a apinako ti man ma nákuuñanee-kúuñan, ti káakuuñu óo káakuuñu enka naataake.”\f*
Throws the following errors when running basic checks with only “Schema” selected:

• bad attribute name: “style”
• bad attribute name: “lemma”
• required attribute(s) is missing
• unexpected character
• unfinished content model

Removing the \w…\w* clears the errors. ‘Maleekoo’ is a valid key word in the Glossary. Marking the quoted text with either \fq or \fqa make no difference, neither does removing or changing the quote marks about the text.
Both ‘Print Draft PDF’ and PTXprint happily ignore these errors and flag the \w…\w* words as appropriate.
So should we just deny the errors or is there an underlying problem to solve???

Answer 1

I wonder if using \+w and \+w* will fix it. If so, read up on Nesting here.

Comments

I tried that but Pt doesn’t recognize \+w…\+w* as a nesting marker. So just adds extra error messages.

---

Glossary words inside footnotes should be marked with \+w … \+w*.
Are you using the standard usfm.sty stylesheet (Project Properties…Advanced)?
Is there a custom.sty which is causing problems?

---

I downloaded the latest version of the usfm.sty (just in case that had been corrupted) and installed it in my ‘My Paratext 9 Projects’ folder and the project is using it.
Yes there is custom.sty created when the project was migrated to Pt 8.0. However removing this custom.sty does not remove the error messages relating to the \w…\w* markers in the footnote.

---

In some experiments I did, this seems like it should work.

Could you send your project information to me at [Email Removed]? I could then see more about what is happening on your data (this is assuming your project is on the send/receive server).

John+Wickberg
Paratext support

Answer 2

You could try nesting the \fv, too: \+fv 4\+fv*. Or remove the \fv part temporarily, in order to test, if the errors go away.

Comments

I’ve tried removing the \fv…\fv* makers but no improvement.

Answer 3

If your project was started some years ago, maybe it still uses USFM Version 2 and not 3. You can look this up in Project settings > Project properties... > Advanced

Comments

Indeed the main project does use usfm2, but the copy of the project I made to fiddle with does uses usfm3. But both show the same error when I include ‘Schema’ in the basic checks.

---

John+Wickberg got it figured out. It seems all \w…\w* in footnotes need to be \+w…\+w* and \fv…\fv* needs to be \+fv…\+fv* if present. Absence of either will throw spurious error messages on all \w…\w* even if not in footnotes when using the ‘Schema’ check.
Thanks for the help.